Just to prioritize download in limited bandwidth cables. Like a neighborhood might get 2Gbps total, but instead of doing 1 down 1 up they instead do 1.8 down and .2 up, then split that amongst a bunch of houses.
For what it’s worth, fiber is usually symmetric from what I’ve seen. No idea why the others aren’t.
Edit: So, I found some info about it. According to this post on Super User, for cable (DOCSIS), it’s a bandwidth allocation issue: the physical medium is shared among several different subscribers (everyone in the same neighborhood as you, more or less) and between different devices (both TV and data), so there’s only so much bandwidth allocated to upstream traffic, and that bandwidth can’t be reallocated without breaking compatibility.
Fiber doesn’t seem to suffer from these problems, presumably because it was designed for symmetric throughput from the start.
Side note: besides the upstream speed, one thing I absolutely adore about fiber is that I can use a Linux PC as my router with no special hardware. It just plugs into an Ethernet port on the optical network terminal, requests an address with DHCP, and that’s it. No PPPoE, no special network interface card, no nonsense. I’m going to dearly miss it if I move out of here…
Where I live, only one ISP offers symmetrical connections, but they are not in my building yet. Although they have announced that they are negotiating the rights to come in here.
If ever I can do it. I’ll switch in a heartbeat and self-host a few things.
Because they can. Most people’s typical usage isn’t impacted by low uplink bandwidth. Very few people are uploading 4K content or live streaming or hosting a high traffic webserver from their garage. Less bandwidth means less expense, thus more profit. Capitalism, baby.
People’s typical usage may change as a result of more bandwidth being available, though. Peer-to-peer videoconferencing, for instance, is almost impossible with the upstream bandwidth available now.
In the old world of the internet, people didn’t upload much anyway.
Nobody worked from home. Nobody had their phones constantly syncing photos and videos to 1 (or often more) clouds. And even then, the photos and videos that you could take digitally were very low resolution and not very large files. Game consoles weren’t online by default until Xbox Gen 1 (and as an add on for GC and PS2) and PC gamers were a minority (and rarely direct peer-to-peer).
That has changed, and nobody forced ISPs to keep up. In a lot of markets, the Cable ISP is a monopoly and they don’t have to do shit about it.
@dingus@worfamerryman On DSL you have a limited set of frequencies that you can use for either upload or download. So you have to split these frequencies between upload and download. Also the DSL speed is highly depending on the length of the copper between your home and the switch cabinet on the street. (Just remember: DSL is the transmission of high frequencies over unshielded cables that never meant to transmit high frequencies) So the longer the cable, the lower the total possible bandwidth. And most people have a demand for a higher download than upload. So most people will prefer some 16 down, 2 up instead of 8 down and 8 up.
Is there a legit reason they do not do this?
Just to prioritize download in limited bandwidth cables. Like a neighborhood might get 2Gbps total, but instead of doing 1 down 1 up they instead do 1.8 down and .2 up, then split that amongst a bunch of houses.
For what it’s worth, fiber is usually symmetric from what I’ve seen.
No idea why the others aren’t.Edit: So, I found some info about it. According to this post on Super User, for cable (DOCSIS), it’s a bandwidth allocation issue: the physical medium is shared among several different subscribers (everyone in the same neighborhood as you, more or less) and between different devices (both TV and data), so there’s only so much bandwidth allocated to upstream traffic, and that bandwidth can’t be reallocated without breaking compatibility.
Fiber doesn’t seem to suffer from these problems, presumably because it was designed for symmetric throughput from the start.
Side note: besides the upstream speed, one thing I absolutely adore about fiber is that I can use a Linux PC as my router with no special hardware. It just plugs into an Ethernet port on the optical network terminal, requests an address with DHCP, and that’s it. No PPPoE, no special network interface card, no nonsense. I’m going to dearly miss it if I move out of here…
Where I live, only one ISP offers symmetrical connections, but they are not in my building yet. Although they have announced that they are negotiating the rights to come in here.
If ever I can do it. I’ll switch in a heartbeat and self-host a few things.
Because they can. Most people’s typical usage isn’t impacted by low uplink bandwidth. Very few people are uploading 4K content or live streaming or hosting a high traffic webserver from their garage. Less bandwidth means less expense, thus more profit. Capitalism, baby.
People’s typical usage may change as a result of more bandwidth being available, though. Peer-to-peer videoconferencing, for instance, is almost impossible with the upstream bandwidth available now.
We also need to do away with NAT…
In the old world of the internet, people didn’t upload much anyway.
Nobody worked from home. Nobody had their phones constantly syncing photos and videos to 1 (or often more) clouds. And even then, the photos and videos that you could take digitally were very low resolution and not very large files. Game consoles weren’t online by default until Xbox Gen 1 (and as an add on for GC and PS2) and PC gamers were a minority (and rarely direct peer-to-peer).
That has changed, and nobody forced ISPs to keep up. In a lot of markets, the Cable ISP is a monopoly and they don’t have to do shit about it.
@dingus @worfamerryman On DSL you have a limited set of frequencies that you can use for either upload or download. So you have to split these frequencies between upload and download. Also the DSL speed is highly depending on the length of the copper between your home and the switch cabinet on the street. (Just remember: DSL is the transmission of high frequencies over unshielded cables that never meant to transmit high frequencies) So the longer the cable, the lower the total possible bandwidth. And most people have a demand for a higher download than upload. So most people will prefer some 16 down, 2 up instead of 8 down and 8 up.
What about on a fiber connection? I wonder if the slower upload speed is artificial.
@worfamerryman Fibre is not my field of expertise. But it seems as if we have got some experts here in the thread.
Thanks, I’ve read the comments. I was just curious if you had any additional information. I’m mainly interested for personal knowledge.